Editorial: What's good for the state, not always good for city

Posted: Tuesday, March 20, 2001

A bill being considered in the Legislature that would place city officials under the same public scrutiny as state legislators could do more harm than good.

While supporters of House Bill 64 seek to remove any semblance of impropriety among elected officials, requiring the same financial disclosures of city officials as other elected representatives such as state legislators could prevent qualified individuals from seeking office and deprive communities of responsible leadership.

The bill sponsored by state Rep. Steven D. Wolens of Dallas, would require candidates for municipal offices such as city council, city manager and city attorney to file financial disclosure statements identical to state legislators. The goal is to remove any potential conflict of interest among city officials who could determine the allocation of taxpayer money. However, many communities, including Amarillo, already recognize local laws that would prevent such a possibility.

Combine these laws with the potential that qualified candidates would avoid running for city offices, which regularly pay low salaries, and the legislation could have a detrimental effect.

Amarillo Mayor Kel Seliger and City Commissioner Trent Sisemore, both prominent businessmen as well as city officials, did not question the reasoning behind the bill, but identified potential drawbacks. Seliger is not seeking an additional term as mayor. Sisemore has officially declared for the office.

"For a $10 a week job I don't know if that would be worth it," said Sisemore, a city commissioner for six years. "There would be some good people that would not run for office."

Seliger sees the legislation as duplicative of ethics rules in the city charter that prevent city officials from contracting with the city.

"I'm very much in favor of strict ethics laws," Seliger said. "But if a person is not going to obey these laws, they can falsify a financial disclosure statement."

Sisemore and Seliger also pointed out that it is rare for city officials to become involved in a possible conflict of interest regarding a city contract.

Local government officials do not operate under the same guidelines as state legislators, and the possibility of a city official engaging in a conflict of interest is remote due to existing local laws, the nature of the office and the public scope of city government. While the objective of the bill is admirable, the specifics of its application make it seem unrealistic that this goal can be accomplished.